Community Tiering for all 3.5 Base Classes

[BaronDoctor]

Since the thread's getting long, I made a tally sheet of everyone's votes thus far for easier reference.

Oops. I think I started voting on things once or twice and then had to go somewhere because I had a tendency to get long-winded so I didn't end up voting. That said, let's try this time.

Druid: 1. You're a day away from any solution with divine spellcasting, and you can solve a lot of problems between now and then with judicious application of summons, wild shape, and your animal companion.

Duskblade: 43 It's in the awkward Tier 3.5 area. They're good at combat, they're moderately diverse in what they can do with relation to combat, but they tend to only be adequate at things that aren't combat. Find a way to add spells to their list and they might be able to hit 3 proper.

Expert (NPC): 65 A fair number of class skills, but you're pretty strictly working off just your numbers. With some trickery you can make them into better numbers, but you don't have any sort of improvements you can pull.

Expert (UA): 45 Create-your-own-roguish-archetype, with a bunch of class features you can mix and match. Can fall to T5 if the "bonus feats" get used for regular feats instead of "insert class feature here".

Factotum: 3 Enough spells that you can contribute to help solve problems but not so much you start swinging around Mjolnir. Skills and the class features to boost them. Extra Standard Actions never go amiss.

Favored Soul: 2X A good chunk of spells known. An entirely adequate spell list. Do you have win buttons? At pretty much every level, if you pick spells well. If you don't? You could have trouble.

[eggynack]

What will this actually prove? Comparing an ability/class without a tier to a class with a tier doesn't actually prove anything. Won't comparing classes with the same ability already in a tier be a better use of time? Like if both Duskblade and Adept have See Invisibility on their list, you compare them together to see which tier this ability will get you to or if that ability isn't contributing to a higher tier class's ability to be in that tier.

Isn't it pretty straightforward? If beguiler is better than, equal to, or even a bit worse than sorcerer, and sorcerer is tier two (they are), then beguiler should be tier two. You, in countering the notion that beguilers are at the same power level, are pointing to shrink item, and only to shrink item. I don't think it's enough to establish sorcerer superiority. I don't think it's even enough to establish sorcerer superiority at that spell level, because beguiler thirds are really good, and really numerous. I think that, while a sorcerer with shrink item as their only third might potentially be better against a weird goblin scenario (not even sure on that account, given how many applicable options the beguiler has), they're not the better class.

I hope to prove all of that to you, such that you will be convinced that beguilers are tier two. Overcoming shrink item is not itself sufficient for that, but it is necessary, and I think I can prove that beguilers do in fact overcome that spell. And, even if they fail to overcome shrink item somehow, such that they are at all levels at the mercy of this one weird spell, I'll probably wind up pointing out that the vast majority of sorcerers are unlikely to take this apparently top level optimization spell, meaning that beguilers still aren't necessarily weaker, because anything below that highest optimization scenario might leave sorcerers behind. And if sorcerers are behind at anything besides the highest level of optimization, then I think any reasonable weighting of optimization levels will put sorcerers behind on average.

So, yeah. That's what I think this will actually prove.

Edit: By the way, I should have dread necromancers at 2 on that spreadsheet. Pretty much changed my ranking here, and if not there then in my arguments for it that followed, and if not there also then over here in this moment.

[Komatik]

Excellent work, thank you. I wonder if you could =truncate the votes and find the average value for each class from everyone's first pick? That might be interesting to see how high or low in each tier a class is. Also, I voted FS as T2. Sorry if it got lost in the thread.

I actually have an Excel sheet that I haven't implemented in Google Sheets yet. With the votes in the Google Sheets doc I can pick a class and it'll calculate through the alternative vote automatically.

[Karl Aegis]

Isn't it pretty straightforward? If beguiler is better than, equal to, or even a bit worse than sorcerer, and sorcerer is tier two (they are), then beguiler should be tier two. You, in countering the notion that beguilers are at the same power level, are pointing to shrink item, and only to shrink item. I don't think it's enough to establish sorcerer superiority. I don't think it's even enough to establish sorcerer superiority at that spell level, because beguiler thirds are really good, and really numerous. I think that, while a sorcerer with shrink item as their only third might potentially be better against a weird goblin scenario (not even sure on that account, given how many applicable options the beguiler has), they're not the better class.

I hope to prove all of that to you, such that you will be convinced that beguilers are tier two. Overcoming shrink item is not itself sufficient for that, but it is necessary, and I think I can prove that beguilers do in fact overcome that spell. And, even if they fail to overcome shrink item somehow, such that they are at all levels at the mercy of this one weird spell, I'll probably wind up pointing out that the vast majority of sorcerers are unlikely to take this apparently top level optimization spell, meaning that beguilers still aren't necessarily weaker, because anything below that highest optimization scenario might leave sorcerers behind. And if sorcerers are behind at anything besides the highest level of optimization, then I think any reasonable weighting of optimization levels will put sorcerers behind on average.

So, yeah. That's what I think this will actually prove.

Edit: By the way, I should have dread necromancers at 2 on that spreadsheet. Pretty much changed my ranking here, and if not there then in my arguments for it that followed, and if not there also then over here in this moment.

Proving Beguilers are better than Sorcerers doesn't prove they have enough Tier 1 capabilities to get into Tier 2. I find it hard to believe any class can get into Tier 2 without being able to target an enemy's fortitude or reflex saving throws effectively. Even something as simple as Destruction and Flame Strike would work.

[GilesTheCleric]

Proving Beguilers are better than Sorcerers doesn't prove they have enough Tier 1 capabilities to get into Tier 2. I find it hard to believe any class can get into Tier 2 without being able to target an enemy's fortitude or reflex saving throws effectively. Even something as simple as Destruction and Flame Strike would work.

I'm not sure I understand your argument here. FSs have a whole lot of holes in their spells lists as well, but almost everyone voted for them to be T2.

[eggynack]

Proving Beguilers are better than Sorcerers doesn't prove they have enough Tier 1 capabilities to get into Tier 2. I find it hard to believe any class can get into Tier 2 without being able to target an enemy's fortitude or reflex saving throws effectively. Even something as simple as Destruction and Flame Strike would work.

A lot of really cool beguiler stuff doesn't target fortitude or reflex, because it doesn't target a save at all. Obscuring mist at first, with silent image thrown in if your opponents don't interact with it (I'll just skip listing other image spells from here), invisibility, mirror image, fog cloud, and even glitterdust for the revealing part at second, dispel magic, glibness, and haste at third, and solid fog at fourth (there are others, but I think this one is really important). Fifth level spells don't have all that much along these lines, but sixth has greater dispel and true seeing, and sevenths and eighths, while they do have relevant stuff, are kinda past the point where I'm positing major beguiler advantages. And, along with all of that, you're getting charm/dominate based minionmancy applied to stuff without high will saves, and advanced learning for stuff like simulacrum, ice assassin, and shadow whatever. So, while beguilers are bad at directly targeting low fortitude and reflex saves, they make up for it with the ability to attack those opponents in a number of different ways. And I'd take solid fog over flame strike any day.

[Karl Aegis]

I'm not sure I understand your argument here. FSs have a whole lot of holes in their spells lists as well, but almost everyone voted for them to be T2.

Wait, does the cleric list not have a fortitude save, a reflex save and a will save on it?

[GilesTheCleric]

Wait, does the cleric list not have a fortitude save, a reflex save and a will save on it?

So as long as a class can do 1d6 vs reflex, suddenly it's T2? No accounting for no-saves, SoLs, minions, or any other means to get the same effect?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Proving Beguilers are better than Sorcerers doesn't prove they have enough Tier 1 capabilities to get into Tier 2. I find it hard to believe any class can get into Tier 2 without being able to target an enemy's fortitude or reflex saving throws effectively. Even something as simple as Destruction and Flame Strike would work.

The whole point of the argument was that as optimization levels increase, the Beguiler (and Dread Necro)'s list expand almost exponentially, on the strength of things like Arcane Disciple, Runestaffs, and PrCs. (To say nothing of minions)

[eggynack]

The whole point of the argument was that as optimization levels increase, the Beguiler (and Dread Necro)'s list expand almost exponentially, on the strength of things like Arcane Disciple, Runestaffs, and PrCs. (To say nothing of minions)

Well, that too. But a big part of my point is that this idea of "tier one capabilities" doesn't actually mean that much. If the sorcerer is doing "tier one" stuff, and the beguiler is generally more useful than the sorcerer, then the beguiler is either doing "tier one stuff" better than a sorcerer (because, y'know, they get more of these wizard spells than the sorcerer), or that "tier one stuff" is a meaningless concept. All these evaluation tools, like access to game breaking tricks, or general graph of versatility versus power as you move up in tiers, they're useful to a point, but they don't erase the fact that the beguiler is really close in challenge destruction ability to any sorcerer you could construct (if we take a weighted average across the range of levels, rather than considering at a single high level), and that's the case with or without these spell adding features, or even significant use of minions.

The minions help, and arcane disciple helps a lot, but the beguiler is extremely comparable without them. That they are, in fact, present in the game, pushes that extreme comparability to the point where the beguiler is probably advantaged even if you evaluate them lower than I'm indicating.

[Troacctid]

Oh I guess I haven't voted.

Druid is T1.

Expert is T6.

Factotum is T3.

Duskblade is better enough compared to T4 classes to be T3. Yeah, yeah, it pretty much only does combat, but it's highly effective, it can fill multiple roles in combat besides just striking, it has a little bit of utility mixed in, and it compares well against T3 classes.

Favored Soul is a reasonable benchmark for T2.

[Karl Aegis]

A lot of really cool beguiler stuff doesn't target fortitude or reflex, because it doesn't target a save at all. Obscuring mist at first, with silent image thrown in if your opponents don't interact with it (I'll just skip listing other image spells from here), invisibility, mirror image, fog cloud, and even glitterdust for the revealing part at second, dispel magic, glibness, and haste at third, and solid fog at fourth (there are others, but I think this one is really important). Fifth level spells don't have all that much along these lines, but sixth has greater dispel and true seeing, and sevenths and eighths, while they do have relevant stuff, are kinda past the point where I'm positing major beguiler advantages. And, along with all of that, you're getting charm/dominate based minionmancy applied to stuff without high will saves, and advanced learning for stuff like simulacrum, ice assassin, and shadow whatever. So, while beguilers are bad at directly targeting low fortitude and reflex saves, they make up for it with the ability to attack those opponents in a number of different ways. And I'd take solid fog over flame strike any day.

Going Down:

Obscuring Mist, Invisibility, Mirror Image and True Seeing are on the Adept list. Those will get you to Tier 4.

Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, Glibness, Glitterdust, Haste, Shadow Whatever, and the Image line are on the Bard list. Those will get you to Tier 3.

Charm based minionmancy... Divine Mind can be doing that at level 6. Bard gets Charm Monster at level 7. Beguiler has to wait until level 8. Late access to a tier 5 ability won't bring you out of tier 5. Sorry.

So that leaves Fog Cloud, Solid Fog, and Dominate, plus Simulacrum and Ice Assassin through a class feature.

I'm seeing Fog Cloud in the Water Domain. Tier 1 class has it, so it must be Tier 1. Technically, Bard can cast it through Shadow Conjuration, but that's just a terrible version of Fog Cloud with a will save and spell resistance. That doesn't even feel like the same spell. Still Tier 1.

Dominate can be picked up by Ardent, which is in Tier 2. Tier 2 abilities don't exist, so bump it up to Tier 1.

That leaves Solid Fog, Simulacrum and Ice Assassin unrated. They stay in Tier 1 until proven otherwise. Saying they are Tier 3 because the Beguiler has access to them is disingenuous; I'm not going to compare a class to itself in a comparison. It doesn't make any sense to do so.

So five Tier 1 abilities. I don't necessarily think that's enough to get into Tier 2, especially since Ardent is rebuilding it's entire character from scratch every round. Maybe I can be convinced if you can produce effects that target reflex and fortitude saves? Even Adept gets Burning Hands, Touch of Fatigue, Cause Fear and Scorching Ray as a variety of ways to target a variety of defenses, no matter how bad those spells actually are. Even Divine Mind can get a variety of ways to attack, however poorly.

What you need to do is get me some other way of attacking someone that doesn't go through a will save. Barbarian has more than one avenue of attack through attack actions and intimidating rage, you should too.

[Troacctid]

especially since Ardent is rebuilding it's entire character from scratch every round.

Sorry, but how is the Ardent doing this?

[flare'90]

Sorry, but how is the Ardent doing this?

I think with Linked Power + Psychic Reformation, but I'm not completely sure if they have access to it.

[Troacctid]

Ardents don't get Psychic Reformation.

[Cosi]

According to Karl's standard scorch (a spell that deals 1d8/2 levels fire damage) is a Tier One capability because it is available only to Wizards and Sorcerers, but dominate person is a Tier Three ability because it's available to Bards.

I think we can all agree that Karl's standard is a bad standard.

In any case, if you want to prove that the Beguiler is worse than the Sorcerer, you can just test it.

Pick a set of build restrictions (e.g. Core + PHB II), pick a set of encounters (e.g. the 10th level SGT) and run a Beguiler and a Sorcerer built under those restrictions through those encounters.

Arguing about whether charm monster is really a Tier Three or a Tier One or a Tier Seven ability is unhelpful when you have actual empirical testing you can just do.

Sorry, but how is the Ardent doing this?

By using the Linked Power feat with the ACF that (apparently) allows you to make up your own mantle. However, when you suggest that the Beguiler might use Arcane Disciple to expand her spell list, Karl rejects your argument.

[Karl Aegis]

According to Karl's standard scorch (a spell that deals 1d8/2 levels fire damage) is a Tier One capability because it is available only to Wizards and Sorcerers, but dominate person is a Tier Three ability because it's available to Bards.

I think we can all agree that Karl's standard is a bad standard.

In any case, if you want to prove that the Beguiler is worse than the Sorcerer, you can just test it.

Pick a set of build restrictions (e.g. Core + PHB II), pick a set of encounters (e.g. the 10th level SGT) and run a Beguiler and a Sorcerer built under those restrictions through those encounters.

Arguing about whether charm monster is really a Tier Three or a Tier One or a Tier Seven ability is unhelpful when you have actual empirical testing you can just do.



By using the Linked Power feat with the ACF that (apparently) allows you to make up your own mantle. However, when you suggest that the Beguiler might use Arcane Disciple to expand her spell list, Karl rejects your argument.

Arbitrarily deciding a class is in a tier with no discussion and then comparing a class you just complained was placed in a tier with little discussion is somehow better? I'm feeling some double standards here.

[Cosi]

Arbitrarily deciding a class is in a tier with no discussion and then comparing a class you just complained was placed in a tier with little discussion is somehow better? I'm feeling some double standards here.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

I assume you are complaining about comparing the Beguiler to the Sorcerer on the grounds that the Sorcerer has not been tiered yet. This is, obviously, true. But, as has been pointed out, this position would cause us to never compare the Beguiler to the Sorcerer as discussion for the Beguiler would nominally be over by the time the Sorcerer's turn arrived. Also, no class has shifted a tier from its original ranking, at it seems unreasonable to assume the canonical example of Tier Two will do so.

If the Sorcerer ends up lower than Tier Two, I will formally retract any argument I have made about where the Beguiler ought to be based on its capability relative to the Sorcerer.

[Karl Aegis]

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

I assume you are complaining about comparing the Beguiler to the Sorcerer on the grounds that the Sorcerer has not been tiered yet. This is, obviously, true. But, as has been pointed out, this position would cause us to never compare the Beguiler to the Sorcerer as discussion for the Beguiler would nominally be over by the time the Sorcerer's turn arrived. Also, no class has shifted a tier from its original ranking, at it seems unreasonable to assume the canonical example of Tier Two will do so.

If the Sorcerer ends up lower than Tier Two, I will formally retract any argument I have made about where the Beguiler ought to be based on its capability relative to the Sorcerer.

Beguiler's turn was over as soon as you claimed Rainbow Servant beguiler was better than white dragonspawn beguiler which was better than cloistered cleric. That hasn't stopped you from crapping on the thread for over twenty pages now.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Beguiler's turn was over as soon as you claimed Rainbow Servant beguiler was better than white dragonspawn beguiler which was better than cloistered cleric. That hasn't stopped you from crapping on the thread for over twenty pages now.

First, what? I'm not sure anything beats spontaneously casting the entire Cleric list, except for spontaneously casting the entire Wizard list. Second, extremely rude.

[eggynack]

Snip

I think you're missing the point. That wasn't a list of things beguilers can do. That was a list of things beguilers can do offensively against opponents with a good will save. In other words, it was specifically and only a response to the last thing you said in this post. Specifically, this:

What you need to do is get me some other way of attacking someone that doesn't go through a will save.

and this:

What you need to do is get me some other way of attacking someone that doesn't go through a will save.

Yeah, a couple of those spells are active combat ones with will saves associated, but they still have utility against such opponents. The vast majority, though, were directly targeted against high will save foes. If we're not talking direct offense, or if we don't care about will saves, then there's a ton more spells on this list.

Moreover, it's not just about specific spells and whether they appear on specific lists. Give an adept a significantly faster progression and a better casting mechanic and you could probably get them to tier three. It's about the confluence of all these spells, and the rate you're casting them at. You don't look at a class' power by discounting everything that doesn't pop up on a lower tier list. Putting it simply, the power of the beguiler is that they can charm people where that's effective, do a completely different thing when neither thing is effective, do a third thing when those two above things are ineffective, and go pretty deep with that process.

The not simple version of the above is the whole level by level comparison between beguilers and sorcerers, first assuming close to optimal sorcerer spell selection and no list expansion for the beguiler, and then determining how much you have to relax those assumptions, if you have to at all, to get the two classes to the same place. And I suppose another assumption is that sorcerers are tier two, but given that you rank favored souls as tier two, I feel like that's a fair assumption to make about your class placement. Further stuff on that point is below.

Arbitrarily deciding a class is in a tier with no discussion and then comparing a class you just complained was placed in a tier with little discussion is somehow better? I'm feeling some double standards here.

This is a lot more straightforward than you're making it out to be. It ultimately doesn't matter to my convincing of you what I think the sorcerer's tier is, or what the thread ultimately decides the sorcerer's tier is. All that matters to this comparison test, as far as the sorcerer is concerned, is what you think the sorcerer's tier is. Do you think the sorcerer is tier two? If you do, then proving the beguiler is roughly equal should convince you that the beguiler is also tier two. What we're talking here, right now, is your evaluation of the class, where you rank it. And, in turn, where you rank beguiler.

[javcs]

First, what? I'm not sure anything beats spontaneously casting the entire Cleric list, except for spontaneously casting the entire Wizard list. Second, extremely rude.

While I don't think anybody's going to argue the first point, specifically, I would argue that at Rainbow Servant 10th, the fact that you started out as a beguiler is almost entirely irrelevant. You're primarily going to be running on full spontaneous access to the entire Cleric spell list, not the beguiler's spell list (and the advanced learning is capped at Beguiler 10th, assuming you didn't take another PRC). Rainbow Servant is a major fluff, concept, and mechanical alteration/divergence from the baseline Beguiler.


That is, if you go Rainbow Servant 10, you don't count as a Beguiler anymore, at least, for the purposes of determining how the Beguiler/DN/Warmage base class itself should be classified. That interaction, IMO, is something that should be noted with the Rainbow Servant entry in a PRC list, and/or as a footnote in the Beguiler/DN/Warmage "why" entry. Possibly expand that footnote to include some of the other forms of spell list expansion.

Because we cannot assume that every Beguiler/Dread Necromancer/Warmage is going to go Rainbow Servant 10. One of them that has gone Rainbow Servant is massively different from one that has not. And a Rainbow Beguiler probably isn't going to end up all that different from a Rainbow Warsnake or a Rainbow Necromancer/Dread Rainbow.
Some will, yes, but it's always been noted that a higher optimization can raise a class's effective tier. While Rainbow Servant is relatively straightforward as optimization goes, it also sits at a significantly above average level of optimization, IMO, at least in effect. So too do some of the other list expansion options, although they're not as high an effective op level as Rainbow Servant.

[Aimeryan]

Duskblade is better enough compared to T4 classes to be T3. Yeah, yeah, it pretty much only does combat, but it's highly effective, it can fill multiple roles in combat besides just striking, it has a little bit of utility mixed in, and it compares well against T3 classes.

Not picking your post for any particular reason Troacctid except it was the latest one I saw on the point I wish to discuss here - there are many others who seem to share your viewpoint on this, I acknowledge that.

I want to ask if being effective at combat alone, and only in an "apply damage" fashion, is really enough for people to consider such a class as Tier 3? I ask because I really feel it does not, unless your campaign is combat only and only requires damage to be applied.

It seems that there is not really an debate on capability of the class here, but what tier that capability falls into. This says to me that we aren't all in agreement as to what the tiers mean - which sort of makes a tier list seem useless.

I would like to refer here to the descriptions given by JaronK, who's tiers we are using:

Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Can be game breaking only with specific intent to do so. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.

The bolded part here is where I have issues; what usefulness do these classes have when "hit it hard" is not the solution?

Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competence without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribute to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well.

I have bolded the parts of the Tier 4 description that I feel are what suggests to me that classes that only have expertise in combat and struggle to contribute outside of that expertise are indeed Tier 4. That these classes may be better than some other classes in Tier 4 just make them a high Tier 4, as I see it - the very description of Tier 4 still applies.

[Troacctid]

I want to ask if being good at combat alone, and only in an "apply damage" fashion, is really enough for people to consider such a class as Tier 3? I ask because I really feel it does not, unless your campaign is combat only and only requires damage to be applied.

I think this is a false question, because neither Crusader nor Duskblade is only good at combat in an "apply damage" fashion. Both classes' class features allow them to easily fill multiple secondary combat roles with relatively low investment.

[Lans]

You might want to take a closer look at the duskbades spell list. It has a few movement spells, buffs, and save or loses. In addition it is possible to add spells to the list.

[Aimeryan]

I think this is a false question, because neither Crusader nor Duskblade is only good at combat in an "apply damage" fashion. Both classes' class features allow them to easily fill multiple secondary combat roles with relatively low investment.

Could I ask you to expand upon this for me?

You might want to take a closer look at the duskbades spell list. It has a few movement spells, buffs, and save or loses. In addition it is possible to add spells to the list.

This sounds similar to the Psychic Warrior of which I am familiar, with the exception of the save or loses. From my experience there, movement spells (or powers, as the case may be) can be useful outside of combat in some situations, but not enough to invalidate the Tier 4 description. Buffs, at least for Psychic Warrior, are of the type that are rarely useful outside of combat or have some other limitation (got too late, cost too many power points, don't last long, etc.).

Adding spells (or powers); would that be considered average optimisation? Considering that a tier list is probably most useful to the uninitiated.

[Troacctid]

Could I ask you to expand upon this for me?

Sooo it's literally midnight and I should probably do this when I'm awake but here's what a typical Duskblade's spell list by level might look like off the top of my head.

Level	Spell level	Spell	Function
1	1	Swift Expeditious Retreat	Mobility
2	1	Resist Energy	Defense
3	1	Shocking Grasp	Melee damage
4	1	Chill Touch	Melee damage/Debuff
5	2	Ghoul Touch	Save or lose
6	2	Spider Climb	Mobility
7	2	Scorching Ray	Ranged damage
8	2	Swift Fly	Mobility
9	3	Dispelling Touch	Debuff/Healing
10	3	Vampiric Touch	Melee damage/Defense
11	3	Halt	Action economy
12	3	Greater Magic Weapon	Buff
13	4	Dimension Door	Mobility/Utility
14	4	Channeled Pyroburst	AoE damage/Action economy
15	4	Dispel Magic	Debuff/Healing/Utility
16	4	Phantasmal Killer	Save or lose
17	5	Disintegrate	Ranged damage/Utility
18	5	Clenched Fist	Action economy/Save or lose
19	5	Chain Lightning	AoE damage
20	5	Hold Monster	Save or lose

As you can see, a typical Duskblade can fill multiple roles in combat outside of simple melee damage.

[Aimeryan]

-snip-

Thanks!

That pretty much agrees with Lans' post: damage, movement, and some (mostly at the very end) SoL - at least as far as I can see. Oh, and dispel. Are these mostly self-only (for those of which it is relevant)?

Do you find that negates this description?:

DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribute to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless.

Personally, I don't see how it can; thus, I don't see how it pulls away from being Tier 4. A good Tier 4, sure.

Then again, maybe that is just me. Maybe this is campaign-dependent. What do other people think - is being good at damage and movement enough to be considered as negating the above quote?

[Lans]

In what scenarios do you think a duskblade is going to be useless?

[Aimeryan]

In what scenarios do you think a duskblade is going to be useless?

Pretty much anything social, unless your movement tricks entertain. Do they get the ability to fly? If not, there is a major source of non-contribution as well. Then there is anything non-combat of which neither damage nor movement will help.

To turn it around, what encounters would you find they are able to contribute in that a Barbarian could not?